Evidence of meeting #19 for Finance in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was business.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Don't you think that Canada Post can compete with these guys?
4:35 p.m.
Secretary-Treasurer, Canadian Labour Congress
I'm not disputing whether Canada Post can compete, but most of these guys that are here are not the international remailers. These are the print shops and the others who provide important services--but they're not the remailers.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
John McKay Liberal Scarborough—Guildwood, ON
Thank you.
Mr. McKenna, you make a very compelling argument that the cost of CATSA bears no relationship to its revenues. It's pretty dramatic. It looks like a tax increase, it feels like a tax increase, and it smells like a tax increase. Therefore, it probably is a tax increase. Is that a fair statement?
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Air Transport Association of Canada
I think I used the word “tax” in my text. Yes, sir.
4:35 p.m.
A voice
But increased--
4:35 p.m.
A voice
Clearly.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you, Mr. McKay.
Monsieur Carrier, s'il vous plaît. Vous avez cinq minutes.
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Carrier Bloc Alfred-Pellan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. You represent various aspects of the bill, but as our time is limited, we must choose certain issues in particular. I would like to address remailing, which is an important issue. I would also like to recall that we're talking here about subjects that are not related to the budget, but that are included in the budget implementation bill, which is unfortunate.
With regard to remailing, Ms. Margles, based on your information, what market share do you still hold relative to the overall market? I know you aren't aware of all the competition, but do you have an idea of what is in store for you, of what you are going to lose?
4:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Relations and Policy, Canada Post Corporation
I've estimated—and I referred to this earlier—that an amount of $40 million to $80 million was at stake.
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Carrier Bloc Alfred-Pellan, QC
They say a number of businesses are involved. The printers who are here represent people who are engaged in illegal remailing for the moment. So they have a market share.
Mr. Elliott, do you have an idea of the market share you currently have and that you don't want to lose? If the bill were implemented, it could increase. Is that share around 30%, 80%?
4:35 p.m.
President, Canadian Printing Industries Association
Again, it's all over the map. I really don't have a solid number on what that would be. We're not entirely in agreement with the $40 million to $80 million number. We think it's less than that as a total. But it could be more, because there's stuff going on out there in places that we don't touch.
4:35 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Carrier Bloc Alfred-Pellan, QC
With regard to the loss estimated by Canada Post Corporation, can you determine how much your market would increase if exclusive use were abolished? Does an association represent you?
4:35 p.m.
General Manager, Classic Impressions Inc., Canadian Printing Industries Association
Mr. Carrier, I'd like to speak to that.
It's not what we're going to gain; it's what we're going to keep. We've been doing this for 25 years and we've been doing it according to the law all the time.
There are a lot of printers who won't tell us how much. We did a survey. We tried earlier and they won't tell us how much they do, how much they're taking across the border, because they're scared of reprisals against Canada Post--
4:40 p.m.
General Manager, Classic Impressions Inc., Canadian Printing Industries Association
But I can tell you that my business was 50%.
4:40 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Carrier Bloc Alfred-Pellan, QC
We're going to leave it there, since we don't have that clarification.
You talked about the losses you would suffer if the bill wasn't adopted. Canada Post Corporation wants to act as a competitor and secure a larger market share. If you're talking about potential losses, it's because you're afraid of competition from the corporation. As Ms. Margles mentioned earlier, she only distributes documents printed by others. If Canada Post Corporation secured a larger market share, it would still have its documents printed by you. It seems you wouldn't lose everything. Only distribution would be in question. Have I understood correctly?
4:40 p.m.
General Manager, Classic Impressions Inc., Canadian Printing Industries Association
That's the way it would look on the books, except the international.... Right now, Canada Post does compete and they do get some of that business. If the laws change such that we can't compete, you can bet the rates will go up. Anytime you don't have competition, the rates go up.
Already some of those international mailers go to other countries to do their business; they don't have to stay in Canada. There's no mandate that they have to stay in Canada to do their international mailing, so they'll take that business, as they have already, to other countries: to Royal Mail, to USPS, or wherever they want.
Canada Post competes. If that law is changed, if we don't get this mandate, you know, no competition is not good.
4:40 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Carrier Bloc Alfred-Pellan, QC
I'd like to ask Ms. Margles one final question.
I have in hand the strategic review that Canada Post Corporation conducted in December 2008. However, it does not address the remailing issue, which was nevertheless a current issue at that time.
Isn't that a sign that remailing was quite a secondary matter for you? You describe many of your operations, but you don't talk about remailing. That's what the union employees mentioned to us yesterday. What's the reason for that?
4:40 p.m.
Vice-President, Government Relations and Policy, Canada Post Corporation
It's true that we didn't conduct an in-depth study of remailing as part of the strategic review. We discussed that issue with Dr. Campbell, the person responsible for conducting the study for the government. However, we didn't take a position on the subject.
Mr. Paillé said I laughed when he mentioned that we had changed our minds. However, for us, the issue is not having an opinion on the matter. As a Crown corporation, we have to deal with what the government gives us. We do what we can, in accordance with what the law allows us.
This is a subject we discussed with Dr. Campbell, but on which we hadn't taken a position.
May 12th, 2010 / 4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all of our witnesses for appearing here today.
Ms. Brisebois and Mr. Oakey, it's interesting that this seems to have gotten lost in the weeds: this was a top-of-mind issue. The changes that we put into Bill C-9 for credit cards slightly over a year ago were a top-of-mind issue. The biggest issue we were dealing with was access to credit for Canadians—for businesses, but also for consumers--and we were running into some challenges. To your credit, you highlighted the concerns of the businesses you represent. We do appreciate the efforts you've put forward.
I guess I'm still a little concerned. The minister is on record--and I'm sure you've heard him say this--that we have put in place a voluntary code, and that if it didn't work, this would be involuntary. I don't know how we can be more blunt, but I'm concerned by a comment you made that your sense is that some are not planning on complying. Have you heard that from your membership?
4:45 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Retail Council of Canada
Yes, indeed.
Thank you very much for the question. I'd like to make a short comment.
First,
I'm going to speak in French.
Out of respect for the chair and virtually all members of this committee, we are still presenting a brief in French and English. It is important to note that we were invited four days ago, but that a number of other issues unfortunately represent a very big priority.
Thank you very much. I will explain immediately why we are concerned. We are hearing from members, retailers across the country, that they are being asked to sign contracts as quickly as possible—in fact, before the code is in place.
4:45 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Retail Council of Canada
Before May 17.
And I suspect that all of you,
the members around the table,
have noticed there's been an increase in advertising for these credit cards, and quite a bit of advertising encouraging consumers to move the purchases they would usually make via debit to credit.
But most importantly in relation to the code, we have been told by our members that they've been under a lot of pressure to sign. We've also been told—and this is anecdotal evidence, but we are working with our members to offer this information to the minister—that a lot of the acquirers may not be prepared to provide the kind of information required on the statements, or the transparency, so that merchants know what they're paying for.
That, I know, is obviously of great concern to the government and to us. I think our responsibility is to ensure that we provide the minister with all the evidence possible so he can more forward.